From a careful reading of the record, we think the municipal court of the city of High Point, N. 0., and the court below, properly overruled the motions made by defendant for judgment as in case of nonsuit. 0. S., 567. We think the evidence in regard to the contract and alleged new contract was sufficient to have been submitted to the jury.
The exceptions and assignments of error made to the charge of his Honor, Lewis E. Teague, in municipal court of the city of High Point, as to his failure to define a contract nowhere appears to any part of the charge as given. An “unpointed, broadside” exception to the “charge as given” will not be considered. Rawls v. Lupton, 193 N. C., 428. We may say, however, taking the charge as a whole, and not disconnectedly and giving it a liberal construction, we think the contentions of the litigants to the controversy, and the law applicable to the facts, were fairly and correctly given. The court below affirmed the judgment of the municipal court of the city of High Point and in this we see no error. The judgment of the court below is
Affirmed.